Qualcomm Seeks China iPhone Ban, Escalating Apple Legal Fight

Qualcomm filed lawsuits in China seeking to ban the sale and manufacture of iPhones in the country, the chipmaker's biggest shot at Apple so far in a sprawling and bitter legal fight. From a report: The San Diego-based company aims to inflict pain on Apple in the world's largest market for smartphones and cut off production in a country where most iPhones are made. The product provides almost two-thirds of Apple's revenue. Qualcomm filed the suits in a Beijing intellectual property court claiming patent infringement and seeking injunctive relief, according to Christine Trimble, a company spokeswoman. "Apple employs technologies invented by Qualcomm without paying for them," Trimble said. An Apple spokesman didn't immediately respond to a request for comment on Friday. Qualcomm's suits are based on three non-standard essential patents, it said. They cover power management and a touch-screen technology called Force Touch that Apple uses in current iPhones, Qualcomm said. The inventions "are a few examples of the many Qualcomm technologies that Apple uses to improve its devices and increase its profits," Trimble said. The company made the filings at the Beijing court on Sept. 29. The court has not yet made them public.

Sticker based ecosystem

[HyperStasis]

What part of the patents require Qualcomm to the only sticker applied to new cell phones?

Re:

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Re:

[Lunix Nutcase]

Apple is phasing out Qualcomm by buying Intel modems. Once Apple doesn’t need CDMA support they could probably drop Qualcomm completely.

Re:

[Anonymous Coward]

They can, except it's common knowledge that if you want an iPhone where the cellular modem works, you want a CDMA-capable iPhone.

The Intel modems are complete garbage, and even with Apple throttling the Qualcomm modems to make them match the Intel ones at max speed, the Qualcomm modems still vastly outperform the Intel modems at low SNRs. (Yes, Apple's firmware artificially slows down Qualcomm modems to make them seem on par with Intel modems.) Unless you live next to a cell tower, and never leave your hous

Re:

[Lunix Nutcase]

and as it stands, their devices are absolutely infringing and should be banned.

As what stands? What court has made this determination and where is the ruling? Just because Qualcomm alleges something does not make it true.

Re:

[jellomizer]

Apple has always had a tentative nature with its 3rd party supplier. As a 3rd party supplier you can make a ton of money off of Apple... However if you don't or can't give them a deal that they feel they deserve, they will drop you in heartbeat, even if you though you had a firm grasp in their market with all the vendor lock in tricks you can come up with.

Apple very successfully had moved its Mac systems from Motorola to PowerPC to Intel. Their business is designed not to be dependent on 3rd party provide

Re:

[DontBeAMoran]

Apple very successfully had moved its Mac systems from Motorola to PowerPC to Intel. Their business is designed not to be dependent on 3rd party providers.

Which is why they're moving Macs to their own Axx chips. Total lack of meaningful updates on both the Mac mini and MacBook Air should be proof enough that they will be the first systems to switch, allowing Apple to lower the prices of these Macs at the same time.

Re:

[jellomizer]

I doubt Apple will lower the prices on its Macs. That isn't their business model.

Re:

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

The Slashdot dilemma

[Anonymous Coward]

[ ] Monopolies and process patents are evil
[ ] Apple is teh suck

Choose wisely.

Re:

[sexconker]

[X] Monopolies and process patents are evil
[X] Apple is teh suck

Re:

[future assassin]

You should have used single selection fields like this

() Monopolies and process patents are evil
() Apple is teh suck

Choose wisely.

Re:high stakes for Qualcomm

[UnknowingFool]

Exposing their double dipping might have disastrous consequences in China. After all, invalidating their patents could allow a myriad of copycat chips to be made.

Re: high stakes for Qualcomm

[Anonymous Coward]

How are patents for force touch related to any frand agreements? They're not talking about patents related to any standards.

Re:

[UnknowingFool]

It's the nature of any patent infringement lawsuit: Claim that something violates a patent even if it isn't remotely close. It's costly and time-consuming to fight. That's why companies buy patent portfolios: mutually assured destruction is a deterrent in patent wars.

Re:

[jellomizer]

Well if you look at how Apple dropped the ball, with Microsoft copying many of its elements, that Apple could had protected itself from. Making Microsoft the victor in the PC war, Apple with the iPhone patented the heck out of it (Steve Jobs admitted this publicly during the keynote 10 years ago revealing the iPhone) knowing not all of the patients will stick, but having them in place will allow them to protect as much as they can.

Now Samsung, getting caught with its pants down, more or less had to change t

Qualcomm on the block next year?

[deviated_prevert]

OH the irony! Now what would be really funny is if we see Microsoft buy into the lawsuits and even buy up a large portion of Qualcomm under Nokia. Nokia phones with a Microsoft branded Android OS would be one hell of a funny outcome if Qualcomm takes a dive trying to extort Apple. I just wonder why they don't go after Apple somewhere in the states, seems that they don't have the cojones. Then again Qualcomm most likely does not yet have the secondary support from Redmond quite yet to take on the Apple. Seem

Re:

[UnknowingFool]

I understand there's a difference between a claim and a fact. Qualcomm can claim anything they want; they have to prove it in court. However the danger to Qualcomm is that Apple can certainly retaliate. One way is to invalidate Qualcomm's patents in China: that would open up for any Chinese company to build tech based on those invalid patents. By the time Qualcomm tries to sort out who is blatantly copying and who is legitimately using tech, they'll be in litigation for years.

Re:

[deviated_prevert]

Qualcomm is going after Apple in the US [cnbc.com] for violation of Qualcomm's US patents. It's going after Apple in China too, for violation of Qualcomm's China patents. I swear, you tech fucks don't understand a damn thing about patents. They ONLY cover for the country that issued them! A US patent has zero force outside of the US. Canada, China, Germany - no force at all. Each country has its own patents and laws related. Qualcomm will probably end up suing Apple in ALL the countries where it has those patents - and if it wins, Apple won't be able to sell OR build in any of those countries.

The US suits are more of a tit for tat shot because Apple sued Qualcomm first. What would be more interesting is if when Qualcomm gets shot down but the courts in both China and the US it then decides to go after Intel. However I suspect that Intel used some "clean" engineers to do the reverse work and will come out smelling like a rose in a shithouse and Qualcomm will not dare stir the pot by going after Intel. It took Intel 15 years to break into the CDMA market to the point where Apple feels comfortable

Apple buys Qualcomm, problem solved

[jsepeta]

and they could put the hurt on android